Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40771742›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2025

Role of immature granulocyte and blood biomarkers in predicting perforated acute appendicitis using machine learning model.

Zeynep Kucukakcali, Sami Akbulut

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Zeynep KucukakcaliDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Inonu University Faculty of Medicine, Malatya 44280, Türkiye.
Sami AkbulutDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Inonu University Faculty of Medicine, Malatya 44280, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute appendicitis (AAp) is a prevalent medical condition characterized by inflammation of the appendix that frequently necessitates urgent surgical procedures. Approximately two-thirds of patients with AAp exhibit characteristic signs and symptoms; hence, negative AAp and complicated AAp are the primary concerns in research on AAp. In other terms, further investigations and algorithms are required for at least one third of patients to predict the clinical condition and distinguish them from uncomplicated patients with AAp.

aimTo use a Stochastic Gradient Boosting (SGB)-based machine learning (ML) algorithm to tell the difference between AAp patients who are complicated and those who are not, and to find some important biomarkers for both types of AAp by using modeling to get variable importance values.

methodsThis study analyzed an open access data set containing 140 people, including 41 healthy controls, 65 individuals with uncomplicated AAp, and 34 individuals with complicated AAp. We analyzed some demographic data (age, sex) of the patients and the following biochemical blood parameters: White blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, platelet count, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio, mean platelet volume, neutrophil-to-immature granulocyte ratio, ferritin, total bilirubin, immature granulocyte count, immature granulocyte percent, and neutrophil-to-immature granulocyte ratio. We tested the SGB model using n-fold cross-validation. It was implemented with an 80-20 training-test split. We used variable importance values to identify the variables that were most effective on the target.

resultsThe SGB model demonstrated excellent performance in distinguishing AAp from control patients with an accuracy of 96.3%, a micro aera under the curve (AUC) of 94.7%, a sensitivity of 94.7%, and a specificity of 100%. In distinguishing complicated AAp patients from uncomplicated ones, the model achieved an accuracy of 78.9%, a micro AUC of 79%, a sensitivity of 83.3%, and a specificity of 76.9%. The most useful biomarkers for confirming the AA diagnosis were WBC (100%), neutrophils (95.14%), and the lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (76.05%). On the other hand, the most useful biomarkers for accurate diagnosis of complicated AAp were total bilirubin (100%), WBC (96.90%), and the neutrophil-immature granulocytes ratio (64.05%).

conclusionThe SGB model achieved high accuracy rates in identifying AAp patients while it showed moderate performance in distinguishing complicated AAp patients from uncomplicated AAp patients. Although the model's accuracy in the classification of complicated AAp is moderate, the high variable importance obtained is clinically significant. We need further prospective validation studies, but the integration of such ML algorithms into clinical practice may improve diagnostic processes.

Indexed as

Acute appendicitisComplicated acute appendicitisMachine learningStochastic gradient boosting

Identifiers

PMID40771742
PMCPMC12188776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.